<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (7) TMI 349 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96244</link>
    <description>A salbutamol inhaler listed in the Pharmacopoeia of India was examined for tariff classification under Heading 3003.10 as a patent or proprietary medicament, or under Heading 3003.20 as an ordinary medicament. Chapter Note 2(ii) of Chapter 30 treats a product as patent or proprietary only if it bears a non-pharmacopoeial name or a brand name showing trade connection with a person entitled to use that mark. Use of the manufacturer&#039;s house mark on the packing was held insufficient, because a house mark identifies the manufacturer but does not create the required trade connection. The product therefore fell outside patent or proprietary classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:58:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133303" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 349 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96244</link>
      <description>A salbutamol inhaler listed in the Pharmacopoeia of India was examined for tariff classification under Heading 3003.10 as a patent or proprietary medicament, or under Heading 3003.20 as an ordinary medicament. Chapter Note 2(ii) of Chapter 30 treats a product as patent or proprietary only if it bears a non-pharmacopoeial name or a brand name showing trade connection with a person entitled to use that mark. Use of the manufacturer&#039;s house mark on the packing was held insufficient, because a house mark identifies the manufacturer but does not create the required trade connection. The product therefore fell outside patent or proprietary classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>